Ha! But that would still make them Romulan, not Klingon, forcefields!
No, Klingon. They bought it, they have the receipts 
Stool softener.
Lots of it.
How did I know you wouldn’t answer this question? Because you assume everything is intended as fuel for an argument rather than an attempt to understand those with different opinions.
Yes.
Frankly, apart from the dogs, none of them would be torture if you did it to me. But from what I have read and understood, all of them are torture when done to the persons to whom they in fact did it.
No.
First of all, I am going to ignore the false premise in your question. The correct question is, which methods of enforcement really really are proven to catch terrorists, extract actionable intelligence, and spare innocents?
In addition to what others have said, there is this phenomenon called Interrogator’s Fallacy. The types of torture mentioned in your post seem to be especially prone to it. What it means is that you are less likely to catch real terrorists and more likely to catch innocents with methods like that. Which is exactly what you can see happening in Iraq.
OK, let’s play your silly game.
You simply have not given enough information to give an answer to this. What intelligence would be extracted? What would the result of such intelligence be? Would the torture be secret or public? Would it in effect recruit more members to the terrorist cause? See, even if we accept your utterly absurd assumptions (knew was definitely guilty, knew tactics had extracted actionable intelligence in the past) we still don’t have an answerable question. "Actionable intelligence’ is way too amorphous a term. Happy now?
Now it is your turn to answer the hypothetical, similarly vague (and deliberately so) that I put to you. How far are you willing to go? Pissing on the constitution in the name of saving the Nation just leaves you with smelly, smudged, soaked piece of paper, and a much much diminished Nation.
According to this article in Time magazine, the civilian head of intelligence at Guantanamo admitted that the majority of detainees are no longer of much intelligence value.
The article had some even more interesting information: In the last three years, 234 detainees have been permitted to leave Guantanamo. The vast majority of those released were deemed to be “no longer a threat” or of any intelligence value. And this:
Meanwhile, more on the Michael Jackson case and the runaway bride from the “liberal press.”
Want a reliable source on torture at Gitmo, but can’t trust those foreigners?
According to some people though, that’s peachy keen. Nevermind that it goes against everything WE are supposed to be about. Never mind that we have an admission now that these victims “have no intelligence value”. Is that the new code phrase for Innocent? We need some independent “inspector general” sort of person to join with the FBI and CID, and start prosecuting the torturers AND the people who gave the orders.
Well, yes, I take them seriously. But I don’t trust them. They have done some good things, and opened some eyes, but they are- IMHO- highly biased.
Here’s the thing- if I find a GOP site that says “GWB was wrong”, then it’s clear to me that they are likely right about THAT-even if I don’t give that site any credance as far as pro-GOP stuff goes.
So- I don’t ignore AI. I listen to them. But their obvious bias requires some critical listening and quite a few grains of salt.